Karnataka High Court
J K Cement Limited vs State Of Karnataka on 17 December, 2021
Author: Ritu Raj Awasthi
Bench: Ritu Raj Awasthi
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. RITU RAJ AWASTHI, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
WRIT PETITION NO.29573 OF 2016 (GM-MM-S)
BETWEEN:
J K CEMENT LIMITED
A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER
THE INDIAN COMPANIES ACT, 1956
HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE
AT KAMLA TOWER KANPUR (U.P.)
J.K. CEMENT WORKS
ITS UNIT AT MUDDAPURA
TALUKA MUDHOL DISTRICT BAGALKOT-587122
THROUGH ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY
MR. SANJAY NAIK S/O DATTU
...PETITIONER
(BY SMT. ANKITHA.G.SHELKE, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY
VIDHANA SOUDHA
BENGALURU-560 001
2
2. STATE OF KARNATAKA
DEPT OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRIES
VIKASA SOUDHA, DR.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
BENGALURU-560 001
REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
3. THE DIRECTOR
DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY
KHANIJA BHAVAN, RACE COURSE ROAD
BENGALURU-560 001
4. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR
DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY
NO.63/A, BRUNDAVAN SECTOR
NAVANAGAR, BAGALKOT-587103
5. UNION OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF MINES
SHASTRI BHAWAN, NEW DELHI-110001
REP BY ITS SECRETARY
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI S.S.MAHENDRA, AGA FOR R1 TO 4;
SRI K.A.ARIGA, CGC FOR R5)
THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS
PERTAINING TO THE NOTIFICATION DTD: 16.9.2015 (ANNEXURE-
G1) ISSUED BY THE MINISTRY OF MINES, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
NEW DELHI NOTIFICATION DTD: 5.11.2015 (ANNEXURE-G2)
ISSUED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRIES,
GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA NOTICES DTD:12.4.2016
(ANNEXURE-J1 & J2) AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
THIS DAY, CHIEF JUSTICE MADE THE FOLLOWING:
3
ORDER
The writ petition has been filed seeking the following reliefs:
"i) Call for records pertaining to the Notification bearing No.16/7/2015-M.VI (Part) dated 16.09.2015 (Annexure-G1), issued by the Ministry of Mines, Government of India, New Delhi; Notification bearing No.CI 207 MMN 2015 dated 05.11.2015 (Annexure- G2) issued by the Department of Commerce & Industries, Government of Karnataka; Notices bearing No.Ga Bhu.Ee/UuNiBha/GaGu/2016-17/110 and No.Ga Bhu.Ee/UuNiBha/GaGu/2016-17/111, both dated 12.04.2016 (Annexure J1 & J2);
ii) Issue a Writ, Order or Declaration, declaring the Notifications dated 16.09.2015 (Annexure-G1) as unconstitutional and ultra vires of the MMDR Act and Rules, insofar as it directs establishment of District Mineral Foundation retrospectively from 12.01.2015 by the States;
iii) Issue a Writ, Order or Declaration, declaring the Notifications dated 05.11.2015 (Annexure-G2) as unconstitutional and ultra vires of the MMDR Act and Rules, insofar as it has given the District Mineral Foundation a deemed retrospective date of establishment;4
iv) Issue a Writ, Order or Direction more in the nature of a Writ of Certiorari and quash the Notification bearing No.16/7/2015-M.VI (Part) dated 16.09.2015 (Annexure-G1), issued by the Ministry of Mines, Government of India, New Delhi;
v) Issue a Writ, Order or Direction more in the nature of a Writ of Certiorari and quash the Notification bearing No.CI 207 MMN 2015 dated 05.11.2015 (Annexure-G2) issued by the Department of Commerce & Industries, Government of Karnataka;
vi) Issue a Writ, Order or Direction more in the nature of a Writ of Certiorari and quash the quashing the Demand Notices bearing No.Ga Bhu.Ee/UuNiBha/GaGu/2016-17/110 and No.Ga Bhu.Ee/UuNiBha/GaGu/2016-17/111, both dated 12.04.2016 (Annexure J1 & J2) issued by the 4th respondent; and
vii) Pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit, proper, necessary and expedient in the circumstances of the case."
2. Learned Additional Government Advocate informs that with respect to the establishment of District Mineral Foundations, the issues raised in the writ petition have been decided by the judgment and order passed in the case of 5 Federation of Indian Mineral Industries and Others vs. Union of India and Another by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Transferred Case (Civil) No.43 of 2016. The conclusion of the judgment noted in paragraphs 46, 47, 48 and 49 are reproduced below:
"46. Having considered the issues raised by the petitioners and by the learned Additional Solicitor General in different perspectives, we hold: (i) Merely because the DMFs have been established or are deemed to have been established from a date prior to the issuance of the relevant notifications does not make their operation retrospective. (ii) In any event, the establishment of the DMFs (assuming the establishment is retrospective) from 12th January, 2015 does not prejudicially affect any holder of a mining lease or a prospecting licence-cum- mining lease. (iii) In view of the failure of the Central Government to prescribe the rate on 12th January, 2015 at which contributions are required to be made to the DMF, the contributions to the DMF cannot be insisted upon with effect from 12th January, 2015. Fixing the maximum rate of contribution to the DMF is insufficient compliance with the law laid down by the Constitution Bench in Vatika. (iv) 6 Contributions to the DMF are required to be made by the holder of a mining lease or a prospecting licence- cum-mining lease in the case of minerals other than coal, lignite and sand for stowing with effect from 17th September, 2015 when the rates were prescribed by the Central Government. (v) Contributions to the DMF are required to be made by the holder of a mining lease or a prospecting licence-cum-mining lease in the case of coal, lignite and sand for stowing with effect from 20th October, 2015 when the rates were prescribed by the Central Government or with effect from the date on which the DMF was established by the State Government by a notification, whichever is later. (vi) The notification dated 31st August, 2016 issued by the Central Government is invalid and is struck down being ultra vires the rule making power of the Central Government under the MMDR Act.
47. We fervently hope the State Governments recognize their responsibilities and utilize the contributions to the District Mineral Funds quickly and for the object for which they have been established, particularly since the amounts involved are huge.
48. We grant time till 31st December, 2017 to those holders of a mining lease or a prospecting licence-7
cum-mining lease who have not made the full contribution to the District Mineral Funds to pay the contribution, failing which they will be liable to make the contribution with interest at 15% per annum from the due date. We also make it clear that in the event any holder of a mining lease or a prospecting licence- cum-mining lease has mistakenly made contributions to the District Mineral Fund from a date prior to the date that we have determined, such a holder of a mining lease or a prospecting licence-cum-mining lease shall not be entitled to any refund but may adjust the contribution against future contributions, without the benefit of any interest.
49. With the above conclusions, Transfer Petition Nos.74-76/2017 are allowed, Transferred Cases (arising out of Transfer Petition (C) Nos.74--76/2017), Transferred Cases (C) Nos.43 and 51 of 2016 and the batch of petitions are disposed of. All other pending applications are also disposed of."
3. Learned Additional Government Advocate submits that subsequent to the aforesaid judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court, the District Mineral Foundation Trust Rules, 2016 have been framed which has come into force. 8
4. In view of the above, the present writ petition is decided in terms of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court, the conclusion of which has been noted above.
5. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. The pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of.
Sd/-
CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/-
JUDGE CA